MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416397979 · doi:10.1002/bit.70111

AAV Assembled Capsids Are Produced in Cells Blocked From Cell Cycle Progression

2025· article· en· W4416397979 on OpenAlexafffund
Alaka Mullick, Audrey Morasse, Mélanie Leclerc, Ziying Liu, Qing Yan Liu, Sonia Leclerc, Milica Momcilovic, Amine Kamen

Bibliographic record

VenueBiotechnology and Bioengineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicVirus-based gene therapy research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityNational Research Council Canada
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsCapsidHEK 293 cellsCell cycle progressionCell cycleVirusGene deliveryCellDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Adeno‐associated virus (AAV) is a promising delivery system for gene therapy. However, current manufacturing of AAV suffers from very low yields compared to other biotherapeutics. The AAV dose per patient ranges between 10 11 and 10 15 viral genomes (vg), requiring an average of 10 to 30 L production/dose. As a consequence, production costs are prohibitive for most indications. Our recent studies revealed that only 10% of the HEK293 cells that have received the AAV encoding DNA produce assembled AAV capsids. This observation prompts the question: Why would cells that have been successfully transfected, be unable to produce AAV. To answer this question, we undertook a detailed study to characterize the two sub‐populations from the same transfection, the cells that were making assembled capsids and those that were not. We found that the two populations had distinct cell cycle profiles, with a block in cell cycle progression characterizing the producer population. RNA‐seq analysis of the two populations reveals differences in the molecular pathways impacted and provides a basis for making changes to improve productivity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.666

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiotechnology and BioengineeringSame topicVirus-based gene therapy researchFrench-language works237,207